使用语言分析、众包和法学硕士对在线用户反馈的质量特征进行分类

IF 4.1 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
Eduard C. Groen , Fabiano Dalpiaz , Martijn van Vliet , Boris Winter , Joerg Doerr , Sjaak Brinkkemper
{"title":"使用语言分析、众包和法学硕士对在线用户反馈的质量特征进行分类","authors":"Eduard C. Groen ,&nbsp;Fabiano Dalpiaz ,&nbsp;Martijn van Vliet ,&nbsp;Boris Winter ,&nbsp;Joerg Doerr ,&nbsp;Sjaak Brinkkemper","doi":"10.1016/j.jss.2025.112533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Software qualities such as <em>usability</em> or <em>reliability</em> are among the strongest determinants of mobile app user satisfaction and constitute a significant portion of online user feedback on software products, making it a valuable source of quality-related feedback to guide the development process. The abundance of online user feedback warrants the automated identification of quality characteristics, but the online user feedback’s heterogeneity and the lack of appropriate training corpora limit the applicability of supervised machine learning. We therefore investigate the viability of three approaches that could be effective in <em>low-data</em> settings: language patterns (LPs) based on quality-related keywords, instructions for crowdsourced micro-tasks, and large language model (LLM) prompts. We determined the feasibility of each approach and then compared their accuracy. For the complex multiclass classification of quality characteristics, the LP-based approach achieved a varied precision (0.38–0.92) depending on the quality characteristic, and low recall; crowdsourcing achieved the best average accuracy in two consecutive phases (0.63, 0.72), which could be matched by the best-performing LLM condition (0.66) and a prediction based on the LLMs’ majority vote (0.68). Our findings show that in this low-data setting, the two approaches that use crowdsourcing or LLMs instead of involving experts achieved accurate classifications, while the LP-based approach had only limited potential. The promise of crowdsourcing and LLMs in this context might even extend to building training corpora.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems and Software","volume":"230 ","pages":"Article 112533"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classification of quality characteristics in online user feedback using linguistic analysis, crowdsourcing and LLMs\",\"authors\":\"Eduard C. Groen ,&nbsp;Fabiano Dalpiaz ,&nbsp;Martijn van Vliet ,&nbsp;Boris Winter ,&nbsp;Joerg Doerr ,&nbsp;Sjaak Brinkkemper\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jss.2025.112533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Software qualities such as <em>usability</em> or <em>reliability</em> are among the strongest determinants of mobile app user satisfaction and constitute a significant portion of online user feedback on software products, making it a valuable source of quality-related feedback to guide the development process. The abundance of online user feedback warrants the automated identification of quality characteristics, but the online user feedback’s heterogeneity and the lack of appropriate training corpora limit the applicability of supervised machine learning. We therefore investigate the viability of three approaches that could be effective in <em>low-data</em> settings: language patterns (LPs) based on quality-related keywords, instructions for crowdsourced micro-tasks, and large language model (LLM) prompts. We determined the feasibility of each approach and then compared their accuracy. For the complex multiclass classification of quality characteristics, the LP-based approach achieved a varied precision (0.38–0.92) depending on the quality characteristic, and low recall; crowdsourcing achieved the best average accuracy in two consecutive phases (0.63, 0.72), which could be matched by the best-performing LLM condition (0.66) and a prediction based on the LLMs’ majority vote (0.68). Our findings show that in this low-data setting, the two approaches that use crowdsourcing or LLMs instead of involving experts achieved accurate classifications, while the LP-based approach had only limited potential. The promise of crowdsourcing and LLMs in this context might even extend to building training corpora.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Systems and Software\",\"volume\":\"230 \",\"pages\":\"Article 112533\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Systems and Software\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121225002018\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Systems and Software","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121225002018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

软件质量(如可用性或可靠性)是移动应用用户满意度的最重要决定因素之一,并且构成了在线用户对软件产品反馈的重要部分,使其成为指导开发过程的质量相关反馈的宝贵来源。丰富的在线用户反馈保证了质量特征的自动识别,但在线用户反馈的异质性和缺乏适当的训练语料库限制了监督式机器学习的适用性。因此,我们研究了三种可能在低数据环境中有效的方法的可行性:基于质量相关关键字的语言模式(lp)、众包微任务的指令和大型语言模型(LLM)提示。我们确定了每种方法的可行性,然后比较了它们的精度。对于复杂的多类质量特征分类,基于lp的方法根据质量特征实现了不同的精度(0.38 ~ 0.92),召回率较低;众包在两个连续的阶段中获得了最好的平均准确率(0.63,0.72),这可以与表现最好的LLM条件(0.66)和基于LLM多数投票的预测(0.68)相匹配。我们的研究结果表明,在这种低数据环境下,使用众包或法学硕士而不是专家参与的两种方法实现了准确的分类,而基于lp的方法只有有限的潜力。在这种背景下,众包和法学硕士的前景甚至可能延伸到建立培训语料库。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Classification of quality characteristics in online user feedback using linguistic analysis, crowdsourcing and LLMs
Software qualities such as usability or reliability are among the strongest determinants of mobile app user satisfaction and constitute a significant portion of online user feedback on software products, making it a valuable source of quality-related feedback to guide the development process. The abundance of online user feedback warrants the automated identification of quality characteristics, but the online user feedback’s heterogeneity and the lack of appropriate training corpora limit the applicability of supervised machine learning. We therefore investigate the viability of three approaches that could be effective in low-data settings: language patterns (LPs) based on quality-related keywords, instructions for crowdsourced micro-tasks, and large language model (LLM) prompts. We determined the feasibility of each approach and then compared their accuracy. For the complex multiclass classification of quality characteristics, the LP-based approach achieved a varied precision (0.38–0.92) depending on the quality characteristic, and low recall; crowdsourcing achieved the best average accuracy in two consecutive phases (0.63, 0.72), which could be matched by the best-performing LLM condition (0.66) and a prediction based on the LLMs’ majority vote (0.68). Our findings show that in this low-data setting, the two approaches that use crowdsourcing or LLMs instead of involving experts achieved accurate classifications, while the LP-based approach had only limited potential. The promise of crowdsourcing and LLMs in this context might even extend to building training corpora.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Systems and Software
Journal of Systems and Software 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
5.70%
发文量
193
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Systems and Software publishes papers covering all aspects of software engineering and related hardware-software-systems issues. All articles should include a validation of the idea presented, e.g. through case studies, experiments, or systematic comparisons with other approaches already in practice. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: •Methods and tools for, and empirical studies on, software requirements, design, architecture, verification and validation, maintenance and evolution •Agile, model-driven, service-oriented, open source and global software development •Approaches for mobile, multiprocessing, real-time, distributed, cloud-based, dependable and virtualized systems •Human factors and management concerns of software development •Data management and big data issues of software systems •Metrics and evaluation, data mining of software development resources •Business and economic aspects of software development processes The journal welcomes state-of-the-art surveys and reports of practical experience for all of these topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信